Wednesday, July 24, 2019
How to use Quick Steps to manage your emails in Microsoft Outlook
Facebook announces features aimed at reducing the spread of misinformation, such as reviewing little-known websites whose articles get surges of traffic (Elizabeth Dwoskin/Washington Post)
Facebook announces features aimed at reducing the spread of misinformation, such as reviewing little-known websites whose articles get surges of traffic — MENLO PARK, Calif. — For years, Facebook has built its algorithms to maximize engagement and clicks — a strategy that has helped …
Netflix in talks with telcos, ISPs & TV makers to expand reach across India
Vivo Z1 Pro to Go on Sale Today at 12pm via Flipkart, Vivo e-Store
Samsung says it has made "improvements" to protect the Galaxy Fold's screen and will release it in September, after delaying its April retail launch (Dieter Bohn/The Verge)
Samsung says it has made “improvements” to protect the Galaxy Fold's screen and will release it in September, after delaying its April retail launch — New design improvements are meant to protect the fragile, flexible screen — Samsung has announced today that it has made …
Zeta and Sodexo India merge corporate, meal benefit operations
Samsung readies Galaxy Fold for September launch
When it was unveiled on stage, the Galaxy Fold was heralded as the next big thing. Samsung seeded units to reviews and prepared for launch. And then a funny thing happened on the way to a smartphone paradigm shift: it started breaking. Multiple review units were sent back to Samsung with busted screens.
It was a small sample size, to be sure. First Samsung blamed reviewers themselves. Ultimately, however, there was enough concern to cause the company to pump the breaks entirely. Now, nearly three months to the day after the device was set for release, Samsung’s finally got concrete information on the long delayed foldable. The company just announced a September (of 2019, presumably) launch date for the device. No concrete date just yet — but at least that’s better than the “coming weeks” line we’ve been hearing about timeframe for a few months now.
The fixes are pretty much what we’ve expected from the outset, but here’s the full breakdown straight from the company,
- The top protective layer of the Infinity Flex Display has been extended beyond the bezel, making it apparent that it is an integral part of the display structure and not meant to be removed.
- Galaxy Fold features additional reinforcements to better protect the device from external particles while maintaining its signature foldable experience:
- The top and bottom of the hinge area have been strengthened with newly added protection caps
- Additional metal layers underneath the Infinity Flex Display have been included to reinforce the protection of the display
- The space between the hinge and body of Galaxy Fold has been reduced.
The first bullet point is a direct response to those reviewers who peeled off the protective layer, thinking it was temporary. Again, Samsung put the onus on reviewers there, but ultimately shouldered the blame from a top layer that looked almost exactly like the laminate Galaxy devices ship with to avoid scratching. This fix hides those corners — and the temptation to peel them.
Madras HC asks technical report from IIT Prof on WhatsApp traceability
SpaceX untethered StarHopper ‘hop’ test flight aborted after engines briefly flare
SpaceX encountered a snag in an attempted test key to the development of its next-generation Starship spacecraft. Specifically, the StarHopper sub scale demonstration and testing craft it’s using to work on the Starthip’s propulsion system fails to undertake its first untethered test flight at a testing site in Boca Chica Beach in Texas,
The plan was to have the demonstration craft take off and fly to a height of 20 meters before returning to Earth, all under tis own power and directed by its own guidance system. Instead, It seemed to fire rockets and then was engulfed in smoke, before venting fire out of the top of the test craft for a few minutes prior to extinguishing, with StarHopper looking relatively unscathed. We’re still waiting on official confirmation of what happened from SpaceX, but they characterized this as an “abort” on a livestream of the test.
Last week during a static test fire, the StarHopper vehicle was engulfed in a large ball of flame. This wasn’t a planned event, but did not result in significant damage to the spacecraft, SpaceX later said.
StarHopper succeeded in flying its first tethered flight at the beginning of April, and has undergone further testing since then to prepare for its untethered trip. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said earlier this month that a successful untethered test would pave the way for a full presentation of SpaceX’s Starship spacecraft plans at the end of July, but the test has encountered a few issues since then.
The reason SpaceX and other companies run tests like these is to identify potential issues early in the development process, so it’s good to see them making progress even if that doesn’t mean a “success” in the traditional sense of actually having achieved untethered flight.
SpaceX designed Starship will be fully reusable once complete, unlike Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, so it’ll reduce the cost of launches, and the company hopes to eventually use it to fly all its missions, though it’ll keep Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy in service for its paying customers as long as there’s appetite.
Source: the FTC's antitrust investigation into Facebook will focus on the company's core social networking business (Bloomberg)
Source: the FTC's antitrust investigation into Facebook will focus on the company's core social networking business — - New investigation is disclosed after record privacy settlement — Justice Department also looking at conduct of tech companies — The U.S. Federal Trade Commission opened …
Tinder is rolling out Traveler Alert, which automatically hides profiles of LGBTQ+ users after they arrive in a country that criminalizes same-sex relationships (Zack Whittaker/TechCrunch)
Tinder is rolling out Traveler Alert, which automatically hides profiles of LGBTQ+ users after they arrive in a country that criminalizes same-sex relationships — A new security feature rolling out on Tinder will help to protect LBGTQ+ users who travel to dozens of nations, which still criminalize same-sex acts or relationships.
9 reasons the Facebook FTC settlement is a joke
The FTC just announced the details of its settlement agreement with Facebook over years of privacy practices in violation of a previous order. To say the settlement is favorable to Facebook, even with the record $5 billion penalty, is an understatement; the company’s lawyers are probably popping champagne right about now. Here’s why.
1. $5 billion is a laugh
$5 billion may sound like a lot, but in this context it is simply not a meaningful amount. Leaving aside that Facebook at this point probably makes that in a month, it simply does not correspond to the harm done or rewards reaped.
It’s highly likely that Facebook’s “unjust enrichment,” made as a result of the forbidden user data collection in which it engaged, is more than $5 billion. As Commissioner Rohit Chopra says in his dissenting statement, “breaking the law has to be riskier than following it.” In other words, you shouldn’t be able to steal $100, then pay a fine of $50 to get off the hook.
“The fact that Facebook’s stock value increased with the disclosure of a potential $5 billion penalty may suggest that the market believes that a penalty at this level makes a violation profitable,” wrote Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter in her own dissent.
In the case of Google, which in spirit is similar to this one, the settlement with the FTC amounted to several times the company’s unjust enrichment. Why isn’t that the case with Facebook? Because the investigation didn’t look into it.
2. The investigation was rushed and incomplete
No one likes it when serious investigations of wrongdoing (not that Facebook officially admits to any) drag on for too long, since in the meantime the wrongdoing may very well continue. But this case isn’t a simple one where Facebook may have violated one or two of the FTC’s prohibitions for a short period of time in 2014. The company ignored the government-ordered restrictions systematically for years, meriting an investigation on a similar scale.
Instead of getting deep into the questions of who was responsible, how much money was made, whether public statements were misleading, the extent of public harm, etc, the investigators opted to quickly establish a pattern of violating behavior and slap the company with a nice round number. (Let’s hope the antitrust investigation announced today is a bit more thorough.)
The brevity and limitations of the investigation are evident from the fact that…
3. They didn’t grill any executives
“The Commissioners supporting this outcome do not cite a single deposition of Zuckerberg or any other Facebook officer or director,” writes Chopra. Although there may have been off-record conversations or letters from execs in response to questions sent by investigators, they did not put Zuckerberg or Sandberg or any other big players in the hot seat. Seems fundamental when the investigation alleges complicity at the highest levels, right?
But not only were no executives put to the question…
4. There are no charges or consequences for them either
“I started Facebook, and at the end of the day I’m responsible for what happens on our platform,” wrote Mark Zuckerberg last year during the fracas surrounding his questioning by Congress. Nor is that only his opinion. There is a great deal of precedent for leveling additional, complementary charges at executives alongside those aimed at the company. They might not even need testimony to do it:
“I believe there is already sufficient evidence, including through public statements, to support a charge against Mark Zuckerberg for violating the 2012 order,” writes Chopra, and Commissioner Slaughter concurred. Even if that weren’t the case, they could state with certainty that leadership, if it was not directly complicit in rulebreaking, at least failed in their responsibility to prevent it.
Going after individuals, however, may involve separate fact-finding work, expensive and time-consuming litigation, and of course the risk that after all that, the judge will rule against the FTC and officially exonerate the defendant and set an unsavory precedent. They may have decided that risk was too great, but surely if some revealing information comes to light tomorrow individual charges may result.
About that…
5. You get immunity! And YOU get immunity!
It’s ordinary in settlements like to this to “release” companies from claims that they violated an agreement — like a plea bargain where you get probation and no record in exchange for a fine and community service. But the Facebook settlement gives both the company and its executives blanket immunity, not just for any violations the FTC has claimed, but for any violations it hasn’t claimed.
In other words, it’s giving Facebook a blank slate not only for violations it definitely did, but for any it might have secretly done between 2012 and 2018. “A release of this scope is unjustified by our investigation and unsupported by either precedent or sound public policy,” writes Slaughter. “I have not been able to find a single Commission order — certainly not one against a repeat offender — that contains a release as broad as this one,” concurs Chopra.
It’s extraordinary that a repeat offender that has shown a disdain for the FTC’s authority would get such comprehensive, top-to-bottom immunity. This isn’t just a plea bargain, it’s a plenary indulgence.
6. The privacy measures are honor system
This was perhaps the FTC’s best chance to lay down strong rules as to what Facebook can and can’t do with user data going forward — especially considering the previous ones were shrugged off. Instead, apart from a few new rules like better notification of facial recognition systems, it basically just told Facebook it can do what it wants as long as it files the paperwork.
The settlement requires Facebook to document lots of things. If a new product is a potential risk, Facebook has to write a report on what data will be collected, how it will notify users, whether they can opt out, and how it is (and isn’t) planning to reduce that risk. Nowhere does the FTC spell out what constitutes unreasonable risk, minimum notification or opt-out requirements, or whether a product or strategy (like absorbing WhatsApp) is automatically suspect.
“It is akin to if federal regulators, instead of ordering automakers to install seatbelts, ordered them to document the pros and cons of installing seatbelts, and to decide for themselves whether it would be worthwhile,” writes Chopra.
As long as it files its paperwork, Facebook is free to decide what constitutes risk, damage to users, and how it should handle those things. It’s a bit like asking a bank robber to write a journal. But even if someone reads it and finds something objectionable…
7. The oversight is toothless
Facebook must establish a Privacy Committee, Compliance Officers, and an Independent Assessor to make sure that the rules it sets for itself are sufficient and being followed sufficiently. Unfortunately, what they do is a whole lot of reviewing, certifying, and briefing, and no doing.
The Compliance Officers sign off on the privacy program, to be sure, but they have few specific goals, like prevent this or ensure that. The Assessor also lacks authority, so if they decide the privacy program is not working out, they simply register their complaint and wait for Facebook to justify itself.
The “independent” committee’s makeup will be highly affected by the powers that be at Facebook, which have enormous voting power and will be able to make it hard on any troublesome members. Even if they couldn’t, the committee has no power over management — it’s just another Facebook-issued stamp for Facebook-written paperwork.
8. Fancy meeting you here
Not pictured: revolving door at front entrance
As The Hill’s Harper Neidig points out: Sean Royall, Facebook’s head counsel in these proceedings, was deputy director at the FTC’s Competition Bureau (not the Bureau of Consumer Protection, which led this action) from 2001-2003. His boss at the bureau then was Joseph Simons — the current chairman of the FTC.
It’s probably just a coincidence.
9. It changes nothing, and endorses Facebook’s continued monetization of mass surveillance
Nothing in this order challenges the fundamental problem that over the last decade has increasingly caused friction between Facebook and both its users and (supposed) regulators: that its business model is predicated on mass collection of personal data on its users, which it distills then sells to advertisers.
That’s a business model that should give any consumer protection regulator pause, and yet this settlement is a tacit endorsement of it. The order really amounts to little more than additional paperwork for Facebook to fill out while it pursues its original course without any divergence.
To be fair, the FTC is a reactive agency and as such is limited by in how much it can really require proactively. But it doesn’t seem like they were testing those limits today. The decision not to litigate, the unimaginative penalty amount, and the eye-popping immunity grant suggest the agency is working comfortably within them and just wanted to get this thing out the door.
The requirements of the settlement were barely even considered on today’s earnings call, on which there appeared to be an understanding that it wouldn’t affect much if anything at all. Even the fear that Zuckerberg voiced earlier today that it would require hiring a thousand people who might otherwise be working on new products (a questionable claim, incidentally) went unaddressed.
This was an opportunity for the FTC to demonstrate that the U.S. is a venue where global internet companies like Facebook can still be held accountable for their actions. It was made clear today that not only will a big check change that, but that the check doesn’t even have to be that big.
Robinhood stored passwords in plaintext, so change yours now
Investment and stock trading app Robinhood stored some user credentials, including passwords, in plaintext on internal systems, the company revealed today. This particularly dangerous security misstep could have seriously exposed its users, though it says that it has no evidence the data was accessed improperly. Better change your password now.
Sensitive data like passwords and personal information are generally kept encrypted at all times. That way if the worst came to pass and a company’s databases were exposed, all the attacker would get is a bunch of gibberish. Unfortunately it seems that there might have been a few exceptions to that rule.
A number of users, including CNET’s Justin Cauchon, received the following notice from Robinhood in an email:
When you set a password for your Robinhood account, we use an industry-standard process that prevents anyone at our company from reading it. On Monday night, we discovered that some user credentials were stored in a readable format within our internal systems. We wanted to let you know that your password may have been included.
We resolved this issue, and after thorough review, found no evidence that this information was accessed by anyone outside of our response team.
It seems that if it were truly “industry-standard,” then the rest of the industry would also have stored passwords in plaintext. Come to think of it, that would explain a lot, since Google, Facebook, Twitter, and others have all managed to make this same mistake recently.
A Robinhood representative stressed the rapidity of the company’s response to the issue, though they would not comment on how it was first discovered, nor how long the data was stored that way, nor what deviation from these industry norms caused the problem, nor how many users were affected, nor whether answers to these questions would ever be forthcoming. They did offer the following statement:
We swiftly resolved this information logging issue. After a thorough review, we found no evidence that this customer information was accessed by anyone outside of our response team. Out of an abundance of caution, we have notified customers who may have been impacted and encouraged them to reset their passwords. We take our responsibility to customers seriously and place an immense focus on working to ensure their information is secure.
If you got an email, you were among the unlucky few many majority handful some, so change your password. If you didn’t get an email… also change your password. You can never be too careful.
US officials have struck binding deals for 85% of the CHIPS Act funding; sources: Gina Raimondo said her successor, Howard Lutnick, is committed to the program (Mackenzie Hawkins/Bloomberg)
Mackenzie Hawkins / Bloomberg : US officials have struck binding deals for 85% of the CHIPS Act funding; sources: Gina Raimondo said her ...
-
Jake Offenhartz / Gothamist : Since October, the NYPD has deployed a quadruped robot called Spot to a handful of crime scenes and hostage...
-
NBC News : The FBI responds to Mark Zuckerberg's claims about Hunter Biden's laptop on Joe Rogan's show, saying it routinely ...
